Plains Gas Solutions, LLC v. Tenn. Gas Pipeline Co., LLC

Plains Gas Solutions, LLC v. Tenn. Gas Pipeline Co., LLC

Opinion

 [*702]  Memorandum and Order

Plains Gas Solutions, LLC ("Plaintiff") originally brought this case in Texas state court against Defendants Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC ("TGP"); Kinetica Partners, LLC; Kinetica Energy Express, LLC; and Kinetica Midstream Energy, LLC (collectively "Kinetica"). Plaintiff then filed an amended complaint joining Targa [**2]  Liquids Marketing and Trade, LLC ("Targa") as a Defendant. Plaintiff asserts breach of contract and tortious interference claims against TGP and Kinetica, and seeks declaratory judgment against Targa. Targa removed the case to federal court, claiming federal question jurisdiction on the basis of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act ("OCSLA"), 43 U.S.C. § 1349(b)(1). Pending before this Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Doc. No. 19).¹ Having considered the parties' pleadings, arguments, and the applicable law, the Court finds the Plaintiff's motion must be GRANTED.

I. BACKGROUND AND REMOVAL

Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Defendants TGP and Kinetica in the 151st Judicial District of Harris County, Texas on October 16, 2013. Doc. No. 1-3. On January 21, 2014, Plains filed its Second Amended Pleading adding Targa as a defendant. Doc. No. 1-8. Plaintiff alleges that TGP unlawfully assigned its contract with Plaintiff to Kinetica, in violation of the assignment provision in the contract. Id. at 1-2, 6-7. Plaintiff also alleges that Kinetica closed an onshore pipeline valve, valve 507A-1601 of the Cameron System, depriving Plaintiff's processing plant of gas. Id. at 7-9 [**3] . Plaintiff contends that Kinetica misrepresented whether the pipeline would transport gas to Plaintiff's plant. Id. at 17. Plaintiff claims that TGP and Kinetica's actions interfered with contracts Plaintiff had with gas producers who rely on Plaintiff's plant for processing. Id. at 17-18. Finally, Plaintiff alleges that Targa has unlawfully charged Plaintiff deficiency payments, despite an applicable force majeure clause in their contract. Id. 10-14. Plaintiff sues for damages and declaratory judgment under state law. Id. at 14-20.

On February 25, 2014, Targa removed this action from Texas state court to the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Doc. No. 1. All Defendants consented to removal. Targa claimed removal was justified because Plaintiff's claims "arise under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act." Id. at 2.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.